nagamaki - Franco

Nice set! Based on the work and without checking the mei , my bet would on Goto Mitsutada, son of Jujo (12th Goto Shirobei line), 5th master of the Shiroemon line. Though, it is a bit surprising to see the nanako worn down as much as it is on the kozuka, giving it almost a Ko Goto look.

Sekijo, 3rd master Kihei branch family of the Goto.

Thanks for sharing. The armor standing on the far right makes one wonder whether George Lucas ever viewed this display.

For starters the early Goto masters, of which Sojo was the 2nd mainline master, did not make tsuba. As for seeing examples of Goto tsuba here is yet another link, http://www.mfa.org/collections/search_art.asp?coll_keywords=Goto+tsuba , which hopefully will be tolerated even by someone that doesn't like clicking off to someplace else

Second look rule, if it looks better on the 2nd look it is a good sign. Does not match Reinhard's example perfectly (but, I think extra care was placed on cutting the mei on his example), none the less the mei in question looks quite natural in comparison. how about a description of the sword?

if this were mine based solely on this mei I would submit it to shinsa. But, then again, I would not submit any sword based solely on the mei.

If it has not yet been mentioned, there is a Ju-to Kiyomaro on Ginza Chosuya's website which may be of some interest. Login is required in order to see it.

Pardon, no offense intended, but this limited discussion is missing the obvious! Don't ask, think about it.

There are some excellent shinsakuto being made, but like with old swords the exceptional ones are fewer, and you must know how to recognize when you've come across one. The basis for sword appreciation is kantei. The 'modern sword' that would attract my attention is one that would have me believe it is a Koto sword, except it isn't. But, then again, to each his own.

Hello Patrick, follow this link > http://www.mfa.org/collections/search_art.asp?coll_package=27268 > in the upper left "collection search" box enter " menuki " , then click on the ">" , then on page 3 of the menuki you'll find an example, third pair down, of perhaps what you're looking for. I would have inserted a direct link, but for some reason it did not work correctly.

The Japanese have a saying, "looking at bad swords hurts your eyes." It is the responsibility of each collector to learn what this means.

, so, then, will you be reselling this sword?

This cannot be dismissed out of hand completely without first understanding what it is that is being referred to here. Persons that cut regularly with nihonto can tell you that certain combinations of hada and hamon will result in a higher breakability factor. Swords need to be evaluated each independently, as there are a host of contributing factors involved.

Nice first sword, congrats. Plenty to study and learn from, shape, jigane, jitetsu, hamon, nakago, mei. In time, should you decide to keep it, you might consider a Takeo Seki (BC Canada) polish.

sorry Brian, let's blame Ford for all of this , after all I was only trying to help Milt find an answer to his original question, when all this zogan business, which I happen to agree with, got raised, and then Pete jumped in, and well, you know, I just couldn't let that pass by without a , and, well, so how does your headache feel now anyway? :|

OK, let's try one more time. valid workmanship + valid mei = true valid workmanship + invalid mei = false valid workmanship + invalid mei removed = true invalid workmanship + invalid mei = true, but false invalid workmanship + valid mei = " Ehhh, what's up doc?" invalid workmanship (removed) + valid mei = " Suffering Succotash" any disagreement so far? No, good! While valid workmanship can be found with both, a valid mei (we are in full agreement here), and an invalid mei as well, the opposite of a valid mei on an invalid piece, as far as we know, does not happen! (of course every time someone makes an absolute statement regarding nihonto, the exception pops up somewhere, leaving fools in its wake) Therefore, "workmanship is the determining factor and confirms the mei, and not the other way around!" How's that? Fire away ............ be nice PS Milt, nothing wrong with roosters!

Well then I must disagree with this concept. Both workmanship and mei (signature) are important. I have in my collection a Nobuie tsuba which pretty much everyone thought was gimei because the style of workmanship differed from what all were used to seeing as shoshin Shodai Nobuie (Akiyama method of ranking). The mei was dead on. It papered Hozon to Nobuie. In this case mei confirmed workmanship. Pete, I would hope that you are not suggesting (hypothetically) a false work with a valid mei would ever pass shinsa, should the false work be removed leaving behind only the valid mei, this is total absurdity! Like the rabbit says, "Ehhh, what's up doc?" Yet, that would be your logic in disagreeing with "the work confirms the mei and not the other way around." On the other hand a valid work with a false mei (removed) or no mei will paper. Remember 8th grade science, true + true, true + false, false + true, etc. Moving away from theoretical, let's take your real life Nobuie example. What counts is not the fact that everyone believed it to be gimei, but rather that the shinsa judges had the experience, that is, they have seen far more examples, including the unorthodox pieces, which allowed them to determine whether or not your piece was acceptable as a "Nobuie workmanship". Otherwise, heaven forbid, tongue and cheek, you might be suggesting the absurd, which is raising the possibility that you're the proud owner of a invalid Nobuie tsuba with a valid signature. NO, it is first his work and then his valid mei. It could not be otherwise! Say Pete, ya know what, , if you care to prove me wrong, have your valid mei removed and resubmit it and see what they paper your tsuba as. If it comes back Nobuie, then the "saying is correct" . If not, then I will be eating crow pie ala Klein! How about it, have we got a bet? Loser pays all the fees, and you still get to keep the tsuba Please understand, I'm not trying to be difficult for the purpose of creating friction, I'm only attempting to be difficult to be difficult

Yes, Ford's thought did cross my mind as well. IF, the notation above is correct, it invites a study of Goto Seijo's work to determine the likelihood of possibilities. Milt, please don't tell me you're one of those nihonto autograph collectors after all these years of collecting. "workmanship confirms the mei, and not the other way around"

According to > http://www.artfact.com/catalog/viewLot.cfm?lotCode=exkYa2cC , an example of Goto Harumitsu's signature (valid or not) might be found in Christie's 2000 London auction catalog. Perhaps, someone in the forum has a copy.

hey, first impression of the steel is that this is not true forged steel, based on jigane. It has that bar steel appearance, smooth but not muji, dark-lifeless. It could be the polish, granted. Second, look at the lines forming the kissaki, something is just not right. A poor polish, again, maybe. Thirdly, the hamon, of what can be seen, is too shadowy, no nioi, nor visible nie, lacks control, too random. Fourth, the nakago simply looks like it is trying to be something its not, rust, file marks, shape, just doesn't look right, natural. The wrap on the tsuka is highly suspect, those menuki simply look fake. Normally, when you first look at a sword it gives an immediate first impression, this is a "??? tradition sword", from "??? time period", etc., and this sword doesn't seem to do that. Kantei is the critical component when considering any sword. Hope that I'm completely wrong, just watch, now that I've said something it will turn out to be a Ju-to. One more thing, this makes me recall a number of years ago, when I ran into a "showato" made quite long to look like a Shinshinto piece and it was signed (gimei) by a shinshinto smith. There was no doubt however, that it was not a true nihonto. It was picked up and brought back by a missionary working in Japan immediately after the war.

Not trying to be difficult, but I'm also going to turn the question around and ask what is it that can be seen in this sword that doesn't make one stop and say, hmm? Let me put it this way, I just do not see anything that points to where I can say, ah, yes, this is right, and this is correct, and therefore...... . Not the steel, not the hamon, not the shape, not the polish, not the nakago, not the tsuka. Hopefully I'm way off, to which I'll be more than glad to eat crow. So, please convince me otherwise.

The cost of a polish cannot be ignored, but remember you usually get what you pay for! I've seen nice swords that after polish knowledgeable collectors simply pass on because of the $350.00 polish. Brings to mind the old fram commercials, pay me now or pay me later. Let me also say that an expensive polish is no guarantee the sword will be polished correctly either, collectors need to do their homework on polishers. Besides, the more one knows about a "good polish", the more appreciation there will be.

Let me the first to raise a yellow flag, from the images I'm not so convinced this sword isn't meant to fool at this point.

naginata / nagamaki naoshi, o-suriage, appears to have been shortened last in Koto times. Needs to be evaluated in hand, if no serious problems, a good polishing candidate.

yes, when you see a hi like this one on what was a long blade it is very likely that it was cut originally for balance. This nakago is O-suriage to my eyes too.